I know that John Paul II's visit to Poland in 1979 is often pointed at as a moment that really coalesced the Solidarity movement and led to the end of Communism in Poland, but I've often heard him brought up as having had a much larger role in the end of Communism throughout Europe and eventually the Soviet Union. How much truth is there to this? Did he have any sort of direct hand in the politics of the time? Or is it just his connection to Poland as the first in a long line of dominoes ending with the fall of the Soviet Union?
John Paul II will be canonized tomorrow alongside John XXIII, so your question is well-timed!
Most of the arguments that give credit to John Paul II regarding the fall of communism mirror those found in A History of the Popes by John W. O’Malley, S.J. They cite Poland’s ongoing high rate of Catholic devotion despite being a communist country, and that the freedom given to Catholics was leveraged to resist communism overall. Regarding the Apostolic visit,
For the Communists the visit turned into an unmitigated disaster. For the pope it was an unmitigated triumph. Rapturous, deliriously cheering crowds turned out in massive numbers every place he went—an estimated third of the population of the entire country saw and heard him.
The visit was one of the most political nonpolitical events in world history. It delivered a hard punch to the solar plexus of an already shaky regime and led to emergence of an independent labor union, “Solidarity,” following the visit—something that until then that was unheard of behind the Iron Curtain and ominous for the regime. By the time John Paul Departed for Rome, the end was nigh for Communism in Poland.
The pope certainly did not bring down the Berlin Wall, nor did he bring about the collapse of the Communist regimes in Eastern Europe. The system, as we now know, was disintegrating from the inside. Nonetheless, in the great drama of the twilight years of the Cold War, he was a major player, and he strengthened the resistance to the regime of great numbers behind the Iron Curtain who were not Roman Catholics. (Pg 318)
I find that O’Malley overstates his argument in the second paragraph, and redeems his comments in the third. The Catholic Church—especially the papacy—was a staunch opponent of communism for a long time. You can easily trace Catholic thought on the subject from Rerum Novarum in 1891 to the official condemnation of communism in 1937 with Divini Redemptoris. John Paul II was part of a longstanding tradition of papal opposition to communism. While his nationality and ethnicity gave a new aspect to his words, his actions are better described as being a catalyst rather than causal. For concrete actions against communism, he could be more easily credited with his opposition to liberation theology’s marxist attributes rather than the fall of communism worldwide.
John Paul II was certainly an able diplomat and a staunch opponent of communism. I think his actions regarding communism can be overstated by some of his supporters, as he was much more of a catalyst for change rather than forcing that change himself. That being said, he was a charismatic speaker, an intelligent scholar, and an effective diplomat. He used all of his skills to the utmost on a number of fronts, and opposing communism was definitely an important part of his policies.
I hope that answers the question for you. As always, followup questions from OP and others are always encouraged.